Baxters Homecare

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated Good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 82 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider was exceptional at making sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People with highly complex needs received exceptionally personalised care from staff and leaders with bespoke training tailored to individual care needs. This included areas such as percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) nutrition, spinal cord injury care, and associated bowel management. The provider worked closely with individuals, their relatives, and a wide range of health professionals to ensure treatment decisions were shaped entirely around each person’s wishes. They also advocated strongly on people’s behalf whenever this was needed. This proactive, person‑led approach meant people avoided unnecessary health crises, experienced greater stability, and were able to live with dignity, comfort and control despite the complexity of their conditions.

A person’s relative told us, “[The service and healthcare professionals] are working in a partnership in a way that [person] is at the centre.” Professionals also highlighted how the provider went above and beyond to support families of those receiving care, ensuring their mental health was supported during times of crisis. Another relative described the impact of this exceptional approach, saying, “I can go to bed at night and know [person] is safe and well. I don’t have to worry about [them]”.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The provider had a good understanding of people’s rights where they may be at risk of receiving poorer care due to their protected characteristics. The provider worked flexibly with people’s families, and healthcare services to ensure people received continuous, responsive care. Professionals told us they felt people received the care they were funded for, and the provider did all that was required.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People’s individual communication needs were assessed and recorded in their care plans as a guide for staff to refer to when needed. The provider gave people information in a range of different formats or languages if required.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The provider held an up-to-date complaints policy, and they had not received any complaints. People and their relatives told us they knew how to make a complaint, or who to speak to if they were unhappy about the service. Professionals stated they had not had any cause to raise concerns with the provider. People and their relatives were invited to regular reviews of their care, and they could contact the management team if they needed too.

The provider held a central “Caring with Compassion” book which was over 10 years old. The provider requested feedback after people had moved on from the service, including from people’s relatives. The book held many compliments about the provider’s care. This meant people and their relatives experienced positive care.

The provider was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The provider worked closely with external agencies to ensure a person’s home environment was fully adapted to their needs. They contributed to design decisions and secured appropriate assistive equipment so care could be delivered in the most accessible and dignified way possible. As a result, the person was able to receive consistently safe, equitable care in their own home, surrounded by familiar and comfortable surroundings.

The provider ensured people could consistently access the care, support and treatment they needed without delay. Records showed the management team responded to people and their relatives at all hours, demonstrating exceptional responsiveness and commitment to providing care and support.

The registered manager described how they supported a person when they were admitted to hospital during the night, offering reassurance and helped adjust the care provided for the days that followed. This meant people felt supported, safe and confident that help was always available, reducing anxiety and preventing gaps in care.

Professionals confirmed they could contact management at any time and would receive an immediate response. This meant people experienced timely, reliable and well‑coordinated care, with support that adapted to their changing needs and gave them confidence help was always available.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. Staff and leaders actively sought out and listened to information about people who may be at greater risk of inequality in their care experience by holding thoughtful, proactive conversations with people about the diverse staff supporting them. These discussions focused on building mutual understanding, ensuring everyone felt comfortable, respected and valued. By approaching this sensitively and inclusively, people experienced equitable, person‑centred care, benefitting from strong, trusting relationships with staff. People experienced a positive environment where individual preferences, cultural needs and personal comfort were prioritised. This inclusive approach meant people did not experience inequalities in their care or outcomes.

Records also evidenced people were consistently supported to practise their religious beliefs, by listening to music and reading books important to them.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life. The provider had achieved accreditation under the Gold Standards Framework (GSF), a nationally recognised, evidence‑based programme that strengthens end‑of‑life care in community settings. This accreditation reflected the provider’s commitment to ensuring people received the highest standard of compassionate, well‑coordinated support.

Through the GSF, staff were upskilled to deliver exceptional end‑of‑life care, developing strong communication skills and highly effective ways of working with community healthcare teams. The GSF scoring framework stated that “Care provided is person-centred, putting the [person] and their families at the centre of all decision making…and other healthcare partners are involved as appropriate.”

Staff consistently demonstrated clear knowledge of the signs to look for as people approached the end of their life and understood how to provide dignified and person‑centred care during this time. Care plans recorded people’s wishes in detail, including preferences linked to their religious beliefs, ensuring their final days would be spent in a way that honoured what mattered most to them.